Avaliação da rugosidade superficial de três resinas compostas submetidas a diferentes técnicas de polimento

Ribeiro, Benícia Carolina Iaskieviscz; Oda, Margareth; Matson, Edmir

doi:10.1590/s1517-74912001000300012

Cited by 10 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 3 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The fine grain and extra-fine grain burs used have an average grain size of 25 and 15 µm. Scratches created by particles of such dimensions may be larger than the wavelength range of visible light and may be perceived by the normal unaided human eye (13).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface roughness of composite resins after finishing and polishing

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the effect of surface finishing methods on the average surface roughness of resin composites. Seven composites and two polishing systems were used. One hundred and twenty-six conical specimens of each material were prepared in stainless steel molds against a polyester strip. Forty-two of them remained intact and were used as controls. Each half of the remaining samples was polished with either diamond burs or diamond burs + aluminum oxide discs. The results showed no statistical difference in average surface roughness (Ra, µm) between the polyester strip and aluminum oxide discs (p>0.05). However, finishing with diamond burs showed a statistically higher average roughness for all composites (p<0.05). Statistical differences were detected among materials (p<0.05) in the use of diamond burs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface roughness of composite resins after finishing and polishing

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Xavier et al 12 also evaluated the effect of chemical and mechanical polishing on the surface roughness of three acrylic resins from different manufacturers and concluded that mechanical polishing produced the lowest roughness values, followed by the control group and by chemical polishing. Other studies indicate that different types of polishing interfere in roughness 13,14,15,16 , and also lead to loss of dental material 17 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of surface physical properties of acrylic resins for provisional prosthesis

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acrylic resins used for provisional prostheses should have satisfactory superficial characteristics in order to ensure gingival health and low bacterial attachment. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the superficial roughness and contact angle after two types of polishing and the Vickers hardness of three acrylic resins (Duralay -G1, Dencrilay -G2, and Dencor -G3), all shade 66, indicated for provisional fixed prostheses. Five 20 x 3 ± 1 mm diameter discoid specimens were obtained for each group. One side of the specimens was subjected to standard polishing (pumice and whiting slurry), and the opposite side was polished with special tips. The mean roughness and contact angles of the materials were measured. The specimens were subjected to the Vickers microhardness test, which indicated that standard polishing produced a surface roughness equivalent to that of the special tips. The contact angles obtained with the standard polishing were equivalent to those observed in the special tips group. The microhardness of G1 and G3 resins showed statistical differences.

show abstract

“…A evolução significativa ocorrida nos sistemas adesivos dentais e resinas compostas, nas últimas décadas, proporcionou uma alteração importante na abordagem restauradora praticada na Odontologia [1][2][3][4] . A melhoria dos sistemas adesivos, para casos em que a necessidade restauradora abrange também dentina, promoveu um avanço extremamente significativo para a longevidade das restaurações de resina composta.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified